Re: i want to change no-conversion to equal binary
[Moving to xemacs-beta where this belongs]
Ben Wing <ben(a)666.com> writes:
binary = no conversion at all
raw-text = nothing but eol recognition
I very ambivalent about this change. It does make us compatible with
FSF but I am not all sure us changing API all the time is so much
better because I also agree with Hrvoje's reservations.
currently, no-conversion = raw-text. this is totally
counterintuitive and is
not fsf-compatible.
I agree no-conversion is a crap name, however it is consistent in that
coding systems name are actually
<character-conversion>-<eol convention>
pairs and "no-conversion" simply means "no character set conversion".
One wonders whether we should actually drop no-conversion altogether
if this is a problem.
Jan
P.S. It isn't helping that all the FSF docs prefer "no-conversion"
over "binary".